Publication: Recovery from the Pandemic Crisis: Balancing Short-Term and Long-Term Concerns
Loading...
Date
2020-09-07
ISSN
Published
2020-09-07
Editor(s)
Abstract
The COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic crisis combines the worst characteristics of previous crises. It features a simultaneous supply and demand shock; domestic, regional, and global scope; a projected long duration; and a high degree of uncertainty. What can be expected for recovery from the pandemic crisis across the world? This brief first assesses the projections of economic activity in 2020 and 2021 and the domestic and international conditions that will constrain and drive a possible recovery. It then discusses the potential shapes of the recovery (or lack thereof) for specific country conditions. Finally, it explores the need to balance short-term and long-term concerns, arguing in favor of policies that focus on sustained recovery, rather than quick but debt-fueled and short-lived gains. Drawing on the lessons from past crises, the brief concludes that sustained economic recovery is possible only when the underlying causes are addressed and the foundations of growth are protected. For the pandemic crisis, this implies mitigating the spread of the disease to manageable levels while keeping the economy sufficiently active. In the short term, economic policy should focus on preventing further poverty, averting unnecessary business closures, and avoiding lasting damage to human capital and productivity. In the long term, policy reform should address the structural vulnerabilities that the pandemic crisis has exposed. This includes reforms to expand labor and business formalization; to improve the coverage and adequacy of social protection; to extend financial inclusion to elderly, rural, and poor people; to promote digital transformation across society; and, most basically, to improve access to and quality of public health care.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Loayza, Norman V.; Sanghi, Apurva; Shaharuddin, Nurlina; Wuester, Lucie. 2020. Recovery from the Pandemic Crisis: Balancing Short-Term and Long-Term Concerns. Research and Policy Brief;. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/34462 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Costs and Trade-Offs in the Fight Against the COVID-19 Pandemic(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2020-05-15)The world is experiencing the worst pandemic crisis in one hundred years. By mid-April 2020, more than 80 percent of countries around the world had imposed strict containment and mitigation measures to control the spread of the disease. The economic fallout has been immense, with dire consequences for poverty and welfare, particularly in developing countries. This Brief first documents the global economic contraction and its potential impact on developing countries regarding macroeconomic performance, poverty rates, and incomes of the poor and vulnerable. It then argues that the pandemic crisis may hurt low- and middle-income countries disproportionately because most of them lack the resources and capacity to deal with a systemic shock of this nature. Their large informal sectors, limited fiscal space, and poor governance make developing countries particularly vulnerable to the pandemic and the measures to contain it. Next, the Brief reviews recent epidemiological and macroeconomic modelling and evidence on the costs and benefits of different mitigation and suppression strategies. It explores how these cost-benefit considerations vary across countries at different income levels. The Brief argues that, having more limited resources and capabilities but also younger populations, developing countries face different trade-offs in their fight against COVID-19 (coronavirus)than advanced countries do. For developing countries, the trade-off is not just between lives and the economy; rather, the challenge is preserving lives and avoiding crushed livelihoods. Different trade-offs call for context-specific strategies. For countries with older populations and higher incomes, more radical suppression measures may be optimal; while for poorer, younger countries, more moderate measures may be best. Having different trade-offs, however, provides no grounds for complacency for developing countries. The Brief concludes that the goal of saving lives and livelihoods is possible with economic and public health policies tailored to the reality of developing countries. Since "smart" mitigation strategies (such as shielding the vulnerable and identifying and isolating the infected) pose substantial challenges for implementation, a combination of ingenuity for adaptation, renewed effort by national authorities, and support of the international community is needed. The lockdowns may be easing, but the fight against the pandemic has not been won yet. People and economies will remain vulnerable until a vaccine or treatment are developed. The challenge in the next few months will be to revive the economy while mitigating new waves of infection.Publication Fiscal Policies and Institutions for Shared Growth in Kenya : Lessons from the Global Crisis(Washington, DC, 2010-04)This report brings together three budget notes that assess Kenya's fiscal capacity to respond to global crisis and deliver shared growth without compromising macroeconomic stability. The report is organized into three notes. The key messages from this analysis point to areas where Kenya's fiscal policy requires strengthening. The first note is an assessment of Kenya's fiscal stance and suggests an appropriate fiscal anchor for Kenya. The second note reviews the status of public investment in Kenya and suggests the reforms required to improve public investment planning and implementation. The subject of the third note is pro-poor spending and targeted subsidy programs. This study concludes that the targeted cash transfers, unemployment benefits, and workfare programs provide automatic stabilizers for fiscal policy during crisis.Publication COVID-19 in South Asia(Washington, DC, 2022-04)All countries across South Asia, faced with the rising risks of COVID-19 infection rates, implemented severe economic lockdowns in early 2020 with varying frequencies and time periods. While the exact nature and duration of these lockdowns varied across countries in the South Asia Region (SAR), almost all SAR countries imposed their first economic lockdown in late March 2020 in response to the growing health threat of COVID-19 infections. In India, for instance, the national lockdown was first introduced in late March 2020, which coincided with the imposition of similar lockdowns in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka, followed by a national lockdown in Pakistan on April 1, 2020. By April 17, 2020, the population of all SAR countries was under severe lockdown with varying rules and conditions based on national or local directives. The introduction of these lockdowns led to a drastic, abrupt disruption in all forms of physical mobility and economic activities. Trends from the Google COVID-19 Community Mobility data reveal this sharp drop in day-to-day mobility related to four different types of economic activity across 6 out of 8 SAR countries for which this data was available. Figure 1 plots the daily change in the Google Mobility index, which is constructed by taking an equally weighted mean across the four dimensions of economic activity for the five weeks before March 2020. In the six SAR countries, the average mobility remained approximately, on average, 58 percent below their respective pre-COVID levels during the first week of the lockdown. For example, in Nepal, where the lockdown was first introduced on March 24, 2020, mobility (as measured by the Google Mobility index) was 66 percent below pre-COVID levels on the first day of the lockdown; and it remained, on average, 71.5 percent below per-COVID levels between March 24, 2020, and March 30, 2020. We observe a similar pattern of immediate and large disruptions in mobility in all SAR countries, except in Afghanistan (22.5 percent below pre-COVID levels), where restrictions were more localized. The Google Mobility index closely follows these changes in rules and conditions in SAR countries, which varied over time within each country as well as across countries. In countries like Nepal, India, and Sri Lanka, with an extended period of restrictions imposed through national or local directives at different points in time, mobility had not returned to pre-COVID levels even as late as April 2021. In Nepal and Sri Lanka, where the second lockdown was introduced in August and November 2020, respectively, we observe a sharp drop again in mobility after a gradual recovery following the easing of the first lockdown. In other SAR countries like Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan, mobility only returned to pre-COVID levels between September and October 2020. These results underscore the dramatic and prolonged impact that COVID-19 induced lockdowns have had on mobility and economic activity, which is perhaps unprecedented in the region, at least in recent history4. These lockdowns are likely to have important implications on various socio-economic dimensions of welfare, including labor market outcomes, both immediately and in the medium, to long-term. More importantly, the long-term impacts will also be determined by the nature and the pace of recovery observed in these countries in the months and years after the initial phase of lockdown. Moreover, the emergence of new mutants leaves open the possibility of future lockdowns as a policy response to mitigate the health effects of the virus, which could impact economic activity and reverse observed recoveries.Publication The Global Financial Crisis : Comparisons with the Great Depression and Scenarios for Recovery(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2009-08)A recent paper has highlighted some close correspondences between economic performance during the present world recession and that during the early months of the great depression that began in late 1929. World industrial production from April 2008 to April 2009 fell as rapidly as during the first year of the great depression, while stock market prices and world trade volumes have fallen more rapidly than in the comparable period. These comparisons lead Eichengreen and O'Rourke to draw the alarming conclusion that 'it's a depression alright.' They note, however, that fiscal and monetary policies are likely to be much more supportive of economic activity in the next 1-2 years than they were during the first few years of the great depression. The first part of this note outlines some other important structural differences between the world economy today and in the 1930s that are likely to affect how the present recession plays out relative to the great depression. The second part of the note discusses possible recovery paths out of the current crisis.Publication Opening-up Trajectories and Economic Recovery(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2020-11)This paper analyzes the reopening process of countries in Europe and Central Asia after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and provides evidence on the effects of different reopening trajectories and their timing and speed on economic recovery. The analysis indicates that countries that adopted a gradual, staged reopening experienced stronger economic recovery compared with the countries that rushed into lifting the restrictive measures before the pandemic was under control. Postponing lifting the restrictions until after the pandemic's peak was reached has a positive impact on economic activity. Governance also matters: a higher level of trust in government is associated with increased economic activity among countries that carried out a gradual reopening process. There is also suggestive evidence that providing people objective data on the progress of the pandemic may speed up the recovery process.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2020(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2020-10-07)Previous Poverty and Shared Prosperity Reports have conveyed the difficult message that the world is not on track to meet the global goal of reducing extreme poverty to 3 percent by 2030. This edition brings the unwelcome news that COVID-19, along with conflict and climate change, has not merely slowed global poverty reduction but reversed it for first time in over twenty years. With COVID-19 predicted to push up to 100 million additional people into extreme poverty in 2020, trends in global poverty rates will be set back at least three years over the next decade. Today, 40 percent of the global poor live in fragile or conflict-affected situations, a share that could reach two-thirds by 2030. Multiple effects of climate change could drive an estimated 65 to 129 million people into poverty in the same period. “Reversing the reversal” will require responding effectively to COVID-19, conflict, and climate change while not losing focus on the challenges that most poor people continue to face most of the time. Though these are distinctive types of challenges, there is much to be learned from the initial response to COVID-19 that has broader implications for development policy and practice, just as decades of addressing more familiar development challenges yield insights that can inform responses to today’s unfamiliar but daunting ones. Solving novel problems requires rapid learning, open cooperation, and strategic coordination by everyone: from political leaders and scientists to practitioners and citizens.Publication The African Continental Free Trade Area(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2020-07-27)The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) agreement will create the largest free trade area in the world, measured by the number of countries participating. The pact will connect 1.3 billion people across 55 countries with a combined GDP valued at $3.4 trillion. It has the potential to lift 30 million people out of extreme poverty by 2035. But achieving its full potential will depend on putting in place significant policy reforms and trade facilitation measures. The scope of the agreement is considerable. It will reduce tariffs among member countries and cover policy areas, such as trade facilitation and services, as well as regulatory measures, such as sanitary standards and technical barriers to trade. It will complement existing subregional economic communities and trade agreements by offering a continent-wide regulatory framework and by regulating policy areas—such as investment and intellectual property rights protection—that have not been covered in most subregional agreements. The African Continental Free Trade Area: Economic and Distributional Effects quantifies the long-term implications of the agreement for growth, trade, poverty reduction, and employment. Its analysis goes beyond that in previous studies that have largely focused on tariff and nontariff barriers in goods—by including the effects of services and trade facilitation measures, as well as the distributional impacts on poverty, employment, and wages of female and male workers. It is designed to guide policy makers as they develop and implement the extensive range of reforms needed to realize the substantial rewards that the agreement offers. The analysis shows that full implementation of AfCFTA could boost income by 7 percent, or nearly $450 billion, in 2014 prices and market exchange rates. The agreement would also significantly expand African trade—particularly intraregional trade in manufacturing. In addition, it would increase employment opportunities and wages for unskilled workers and help close the wage gap between men and women.Publication Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2018(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2018-10-17)The World Bank Group has two overarching goals: End extreme poverty by 2030 and promote shared prosperity by boosting the incomes of the bottom 40 percent of the population in each economy. As this year’s Poverty and Shared Prosperity report documents, the world continues to make progress toward these goals. In 2015, approximately one-tenth of the world’s population lived in extreme poverty, and the incomes of the bottom 40 percent rose in 77 percent of economies studied. But success cannot be taken for granted. Poverty remains high in Sub- Saharan Africa, as well as in fragile and conflict-affected states. At the same time, most of the world’s poor now live in middle-income countries, which tend to have higher national poverty lines. This year’s report tracks poverty comparisons at two higher poverty thresholds—$3.20 and $5.50 per day—which are typical of standards in lower- and upper-middle-income countries. In addition, the report introduces a societal poverty line based on each economy’s median income or consumption. Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2018: Piecing Together the Poverty Puzzle also recognizes that poverty is not only about income and consumption—and it introduces a multidimensional poverty measure that adds other factors, such as access to education, electricity, drinking water, and sanitation. It also explores how inequality within households could affect the global profile of the poor. All these additional pieces enrich our understanding of the poverty puzzle, bringing us closer to solving it. For more information, please visit worldbank.org/PSPPublication Doing Business 2020(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2020)Doing Business 2020 is the 17th in a series of annual studies investigating the regulations that enhance business activity and those that constrain it. It provides quantitative indicators covering 12 areas of the business environment in 190 economies. The goal of the Doing Business series is to provide objective data for use by governments in designing sound business regulatory policies and to encourage research on the important dimensions of the regulatory environment for firms.Publication Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2016(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2016-10-02)Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2016 is the first of an annual flagship report that will inform a global audience comprising development practitioners, policy makers, researchers, advocates, and citizens in general with the latest and most accurate estimates on trends in global poverty and shared prosperity. This edition will also document trends in inequality and identify recent country experiences that have been successful in reducing inequalities, provide key lessons from those experiences, and synthesize the rigorous evidence on public policies that can shift inequality in a way that bolsters poverty reduction and shared prosperity in a sustainable manner. Specifically, the report will address the following questions: • What is the latest evidence on the levels and evolution of extreme poverty and shared prosperity? • Which countries and regions have been more successful in terms of progress toward the twin goals and which are lagging behind? • What does the global context of lower economic growth mean for achieving the twin goals? • How can inequality reduction contribute to achieving the twin goals? • What does the evidence show concerning global and between- and within-country inequality trends? • Which interventions and countries have used the most innovative approaches to achieving the twin goals through reductions in inequality? The report will make four main contributions. First, it will present the most recent numbers on poverty, shared prosperity, and inequality. Second, it will stress the importance of inequality reduction in ending poverty and boosting shared prosperity by 2030 in a context of weaker growth. Third, it will highlight the diversity of within-country inequality reduction experiences and will synthesize experiences of successful countries and policies, addressing the roots of inequality without compromising economic growth. In doing so, the report will shatter some myths and sharpen our knowledge of what works in reducing inequalities. Finally, it will also advocate for the need to expand and improve data collection—for example, data availability, comparability, and quality—and rigorous evidence on inequality impacts in order to deliver high-quality poverty and shared prosperity monitoring.